It appears that Park51, the proposed Manhattan Islamic Center (called the “Ground Zero Mosque” by detractors) may not prove to be quite the beacon of tolerance and enlightenment that supporters have promised. Or, at least, not on gay issues.

“An enormously, overwhelming percentage of people struggle with homosexual feeling because of some form of violent emotional or sexual abuse at some point in their life. Again, not necessarily in their childhood….A small, tiny percentage of people are born with a natural inclination they cannot explain. You find this in the animal kingdom on some level as well.”

While this statement has concerned local gay advocates, it should be considered in context. As some who have looked at Islam and its relationship to homosexuality note, this is the position of the tolerant liberal end of Muslim thinking.

“I don’t agree with the imam, but I think what he said is progress,” said Sharma. “Usually, from the Muslim orthodoxy, you are prepared to listen to very strong words of condemnation.”

This should come as no shock to anyone, their views on the issue are well documented and explained.

The sad part is that if NOM, Focus on the Family or any virulent anti-gay group decided to make their headquarters in the same building they would be welcomed with open arms; and their anti-gay views would not even be news.

Gee, sorry Islam hasn’t quite reached the level of tolerance The United Church of Christ and MCC have, Timothy, but instead reflect the standing of some of the largest Christian denoms in America (Evangelical, Catholic, Mormon). I’m sure you’re quite pleased that you have a “reason” to look cross-eyed at these woman-stoning terrorists who are building a “victory mosque” on the land YOU have a birthright to. (“probably for offensive reasons.”)

Lindoro: “This should come as no shock to anyone, their views on the issue are well documented and explained. ”

Here I was, thinking that it would come as a shock to you, since you ignored all the warnings people posted about the GZM imam Rauf supporting sharia law, refusing to condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization, calling US policy an accomplice to the 9/11 attacks and telling people that the “grievances” of terrorists should be taken seriously.

“The sad part is that if NOM, Focus on the Family or any virulent anti-gay group decided to make their headquarters in the same building they would be welcomed with open arms; and their anti-gay views would not even be news.”

Would they also be welcome if people of their religion had committed a terrorist act which cost 3000 lives, two blocks away?

Emily: “Gee, sorry Islam hasnâ€™t quite reached the level of tolerance The United Church of Christ and MCC have, Timothy, but instead reflect the standing of some of the largest Christian denoms in America (Evangelical, Catholic, Mormon). ”

Right, because evangeicals, Catholics and Mormons regularly stone gay people to death.

“Iâ€™m sure youâ€™re quite pleased that you have a â€œreasonâ€ to look cross-eyed at these woman-stoning terrorists who are building a â€œvictory mosqueâ€ on the land YOU have a birthright to. ”

Says the person who claimed that 82.5% of Americans are stupid and bigoted. Oops, I guess you don’t need a “reason” to look cross-eyed at Westerners and Christians – people you don’t like very much.

“Lol Dan, I wouldnâ€™t say communist, these days iâ€™m more of a nihilist.”

Priya: “Yes, because the religion didnâ€™t commit the terrorist act, the terrorists did and sharing their religion doesnâ€™t make them responsible for the terrorism.”

That argument is detached from reality, even though it might make sense to you. I’m pretty that people would be against a Nazi Party wanting its headquarters two blocks from Auschwitz, even though Nazism, in theory, is not “responsible” for the Holocaust.

Not a valid analogy Junius. Part of Naziism is about being the master race and killing Jews. Islam is no different than christianity in that both have parts of their holy books that advocate murdering infidels. Many more muslims than christians take this seriously but just as many christians don’t believe in murdering infidels many muslims do not either. Its no more valid to assign those muslims responsiblity for the 9/11 murders than it is to assign blame to all christians for the murders that have taken place in the name of christianity.

Priya Lynn: “Not a valid analogy Junius. Part of Naziism is about being the master race and killing Jews.”

No, no, no, that is just a “misinterpretation” of Nazism, not true Nazism. Nazism is anti-semitic, but killing Jews is not a sine qua non of Nazism – demonstrated by the fact that Hitler wanted to deport the Jews to Madagascar. So why should ‘innocent’ Nazis be responsible for what Nazi extremists did in the 1940s? (note: only the second sentence is not satirical)

“Islam is no different than christianity in that both have parts of their holy books that advocate murdering infidels. ”

Overly simplistic and uninformed statement. Islam spread through the violence of its founder and his successors. The violence that he so extolled made Islam a “great world religion”. Show me where Jesus instructed his followers to spread his religion through the sword, or to kill people who leave their Christian religion, or to wage wars of aggression to spread the faith.

“but just as many christians donâ€™t believe in murdering infidels many muslims do not either. ”

Many Christians do not believe in “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” either, but that does not make it any less a tenet of the Christian religion. On the other hand, if you want to say that violent aggression is not a element in Islam, you’d have to say that Muhammad was wrong, you’d have to say that the Koran is wrong, that the hadith are wrong, that Muhammad’s successors were wrong, that Islamic theology is wrong and that Islamic tradition is wrong. Basically, you’d have to strip every Islamic authority of its authority, and what would you be left with? Hint: it’s not called Islam. Maybe Priyaism.

“Its no more valid to assign those muslims responsiblity for the 9/11 murders ”

I don’t. I dislike the ideology of hate and violence that it is. That does not mean that Muslims who are not hateful and violent (like the founder of their religion) can’t exist, just like there are (many) Christians who are not loving and peaceful (like the founder of their religion).

“Overly simplistic and uninformed statement. Islam spread through the violence of its founder and his successors. The violence that he so extolled made Islam a â€œgreat world religionâ€. Show me where Jesus instructed his followers to spread his religion through the sword, or to kill people who leave their Christian religion, or to wage wars of aggression to spread the faith.”

So then why was heresy punishible by death until so recently(in historical terms)? I mean, if it was so obvious that Christians were to be tolerant, why so much Catholics killing Protestants, Protestants killing Catholics, Christians killing atheists, Christians killing pagans, etc? Were they all just misinterpreting it?

Graham: “So then why was heresy punishible by death until so recently(in historical terms)? I mean, if it was so obvious that Christians were to be tolerant, why so much Catholics killing Protestants, Protestants killing Catholics, Christians killing atheists, Christians killing pagans, etc? Were they all just misinterpreting it?”

It surprises me that you are surprised that people in the Middle Ages were irrational. There is no basis in the life and teachings of Jesus for such actions. On the other hand, there is plenty of justification in the life and teachings of Muhammad.

It is easy to imitate Jesus and be a peaceful, good and loving person. Is the same true for Muhammad?

Timothy said “I am unfamiliar with the Christian tenets that call for the murder of infidels.”.

Of course you are.

Timothy said “Perhaps they only exist in the imaginations of antiChristianists.”.

Perhaps not:

Deuteronomy 12:30

Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise.

Deuteronomy 13:6-10

6If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

7Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

As usual, your cherry picked texts have nothing to do with Christian theology. While your continued insistence that “if it’s in the text it must be a Christian tenet” may work with other antiChristianists, it simply is wrong.

The codes dealing with paganism in Deuteronomy were not adopted by Christianity. It isn’t that “more muslims than christians take this seriously” but rather that absolutely no Christians believe that these scripture apply to either Christianity or to how they should treat those who do not share the faith.

In fact, I doubt that there are any Jews (who, in theory might be held by Deuteronomical codes) that believe that these scriptures have a literal application to how they worship today.

I’m sorry that this doesn’t fit well with your antiChristianist campaign. Well, no actually, I’m not.

As usual, your cherry picked texts have nothing to do with Christian theology. While your continued insistence that â€œif itâ€™s in the text it must be a Christian tenetâ€ may work with other antiChristianists, it simply is wrong.

“All the crazy violent BS in my holy book doesn’t count, but all that crazy violent BS in Islam’s holy book totally does count!”

I understand. Reading is not your forte, or you would have read a book by now.

Penguinsaur: “â€œAll the crazy violent BS in my holy book doesnâ€™t count, but all that crazy violent BS in Islamâ€™s holy book totally does count!â€”

Not too surprising, if you were to realize that the Bible and the Koran are two very different books, and that they are viewed in a different way. Christians view the Bible as divinely inspired, whereas (‘mainstream’, non-fundamentalist) Muslims view the Koran as the uncreated, eternal word of God. Thus, Christians don’t have to take the “crazy violent BS” seriously (and how many Christians do?), while Muslims do. It therefore should not come as a surprise that it’s hard to find a civilized Muslim-majority state.

The problem with trying to attribute attitudes to others is that you actually have to be somewhat close or else you look like a fool.

For example, when you quoted me above and attributed a hypocritical attitude to me, you made one glaring mistake: I don’t quote the Koran – I don’t talk about “the crazy violent BS in Islam’s holy book”. I don’t assume that I can cherry pick text to prove some point.

I am not a scholar of Islam and cannot discuss with any authority the teachings and interpretations of the various sects of that faith. And to thrown down some cut-and-paste words as some trump card would be intellectually dishonest of me – just as it is intellectually dishonest when antiChristians cherry pick scripture to try and set up strawmen about “what Christians believe.”

But I understand that much of Malaysia views the Koran in a manner that Western Christianity views the Bible – as a divinely inspired Word of God, but not one that is taken literally at all times. Thus, Malaysia has some religious freedom and political stability. Even some degree of social acceptance of gay people. I think you could probably call the country civilized.

Again, I know little about Malaysia and this is likely not a very sophisticated analysis.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

The FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.